While the West struggles with the growing militancy of social justice in its own lands, a little known organization is bringing the movement back to where it started—Russia…if it ever left in the first place.

What more fitting than for the humanist international masonic brotherhood to be championing it. Forty-eight-year-old Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of Russia (Scottish Rite) Andrei Vladimirovich Bogdanov helped found the Communist Party of Social Justice (Коммунистическая партия социальной справедливости) in 2012 (1) as a means for constructing a social state, presumably with social justice as its focus. Of course, the movement and its stated mission assume the narrative that communism and its Soviet Union collapsed in the 1990s and Russia became democratized, thus the need for communism to be re-introduced in Russia.

Looking deeper, though, it turns out the entire thing is an elaborate ruse by the crypto-Soviet state to further its Perestroika deception (it’s fake collapse of communism and restructuring to democratization), as revealed by Soviet defector Anatoliy Golitsyn. (2)

Russia’s grand master mason is suspected of participating in a false opposition campaign against current Russian President Vladimir Putin during the 2008 presidential election in Russia. Putin, who has been in power since 1999, has been viewed by some analysts as routinely setting up strawmen opponents in order to create the illusion of choice and free elections in Russia during his decades-long stay in power (elections require a minimum of two candidates in order to take place). All of this was predicted by Golitsyn in the 1960s and ‘80s.

Bogdanov, who previously handled public relations for Putin’s United Russia Party, denies accusations that he is a Kremlin stooge, even though he also avoids fierce criticism of Putin and praises Dmitry Medvedev (Putin’s planned successor at the time). What’s more, Bogdanov managed to garner 2 million signatures—despite only collecting 89,000 votes for his Democratic Party during the previous parliamentary election—to run as an independent candidate against Putin in the presidential election in March 2008. (3)

In 2013, the Communist Party of Social Justice won one seat in the city Parliament.

Bogdanov not only validates the claim that he is a Putin puppet in the following statement, but he simultaneously furthers the Perestroika deception, which involves a long-range strategy of weakening the West through subversion and psychological warfare.

“Democracy in Russia will be even better than in the United States within two or three, maximum five years.” (4)

The logo for Russia’s Communist Party of Social Justice.

Putin’s official opposition is the Communist Party of the Russian Federation (CPRF), the successor to the Communist Part of the Soviet Union (CPSU). It currently has 42 representatives in the State Duma. By contrast, Putin’s United Party has 339. The opposition’s continued existence suggests that, according to Golitsyn’s theory, Putin and his crypto-communist kahal control the opposition as a way of furthering the lie that Russia’s government is opposed to communism and is, instead, democratic. If Russia were truly democratizing, would there a be a communist party at all, much less allowed as the official opposition? You would think that after witnessing all the horrors of communism the new democratic state would have banned communism altogether.

Likewise, the seeming opposition between the Communist Party of the Russian Federation and Bogdanov’s Communist Party of Social Justice appears to be yet another dialectic—a sort of controlled opposition to the controlled opposition, with all three being in on the scam together. The CPRF supposedly has even admitted that Bogdanov’s party is backed by the Kremlin, although it feels Putin backed it in order to steal votes from CPRF. Again, this claim only feeds the Perestroika deception by making it seem that Putin doesn’t want the CPRF (the communists) to win. This is how intricate and complex Soviet strategy is. The West is entirely ignorant of this. But if they simply learned about dialectics (especially dialectics within dialectics), they would begin to understand.

“The deployment of controlled ‘political opposition’ has rendered possible the introduction of deceptive ‘non-Communist’ and ‘democratic’ structures,” warns Golitsyn. “Even so- called free elections do not present a problem for the Communist Parties. Because of their secret partnership with the ‘opposition’, the Communist Parties are always in a winning situation. It is their candidates – Communist or ‘non-Communisf -who always win. No other truly independent candidates exist.”(5)

Golitsyn detailed in his 1988 book, The Perestroika Deception, how the crypto-Soviet state actually embraces the concept of the European Union, as it will make integration between the West and Russia’s world government communistic system that more easy.

Bogdanov hints at this very concept when he told The Moscow Times in 2008, “Russia also needs to join NATO or, rather, merge with a new military block in which only European countries will participate. Russia’s integration into European institutions has been a major theme of his long-shot campaign.” (6) Is this Bogdanov’s idea? No. It comes from the Central Committee and their Perestroika psych warfare division.

Interestingly, with the knowledge that freemasonry helped establish the communist revolution in Russia, Bogdanov appears to corroborate another Golitsyn theory: that the crypto-Soviet state would make superficial concessions to the Russian Orthodox Church in order to further the perception of Russia’s democratization. Bogdanov told The Moscow Times of a church they passed by that was built by a freemason.

“Do you remember a church we passed on the way here, built by the architect Vasily Bazhenov? He was also a Freemason,” he said. “There are Masonic symbols inside, and legend has it that not a single piece of glass was broken there when the church was captured by the French troops and then retaken by the Russians.” (7)

Visit enough Orthodox churches and you will inevitably encounter some of these masonic symbols blasphemously implanted on the iconostasis, in other paintings, and such. Freemasonry played a leading role in the Russian Revolution, as it did in the French Revolution—working side by side with revolutionary Jews.

The masons have always liked the idea of allowing a passive Christianity to exist, so long as they are allowed to infiltrate and run it—the masons’ own false opposition system. And that’s exactly what they did following the revolutions, first with the Catholic Church and now with the Russian Orthodox Church. Both institutions are now completely in the hands of the enemy.

The Russian Orthodox Church not only has masons to contend with but Soviets as well. It is run by mostly “former” Soviet agents, with the Patriarch of Russia, the highest position, being occupied by “former” KGB agent Kirill. Putin and Kirill are both suspected of being freemasons.

This sham Russian revival of Orthodoxy and democracy has fooled the world, especially nationalists in the West. But it’s just another Judeo-masonic trick. Golitsyn said that until Western nationalists give up their failed methods of geo-political analysis, they will never catch on to how the game really works.

Some white nationalists, especially those of the Anglo variety, portray the British Empire as a noble victim of unjust calumny by Zionists. In fact, much more often than not, modern Zionists wax enthusiastic about the Empire. Why not? Unlike the white nats, they know that the Rothschilds and other Jewish moneybags sponsored it, and that it served Jewish supremacist interests rather than those of the British people, much less the foreign subjects of the Empire.

Hardcore British Neocons—Michael Gove, Niall Ferguson, Melanie Philips, Andrew Roberts, and so on—use precisely the same arguments in favour of the British Empire that the likes of David Duke use, but then go a step further and posit the Empire as an early exponent of Neocon moral interventionism—the thrust of their message being, if you liked the British Empire, you’ll love Neocon creative destruction.

In an essay, The Very British Roots Of Neoconservatism and Its Lessons For British Conservatives, Gove even argued that, far from being minted in post-war America, Neoconservatism’s origins lay in the imperialist philosophy of 19th century British statesmen like George Canning and Lord Palmerston.

Even on the left of British politics, the more Zionist the pundit or politician, the more likely he or she is to champion British imperial rule in Ireland and elsewhere. Non-Zionist British leftists—Ken Livingstone, Jeremy Corbyn, the late Tony Benn, et al.—tend to condemn British imperialism, albeit from a debased cultural Marxist perspective, but Zionist progressives—e.g., David Aaronovitch, Peter Mandelson, and the lesbian feminist Julie Burchill—eulogise the Empire as an agent of progress and modernity.

In the 1980s and 1990s, Burchill was the highest paid columnist in Britain—her journalism invariably combining vitriolic attacks on the Irish, the Palestinians, the Germans, and continental Europeans generally, with slavish devotion to the Soviet Union and the state of Israel. Clearly, her blend of selective xenophobia and ultra-Zionist leftism found favour with the Rothschilds, since the Murdoch press empire (a Rothschild front) employed her as a star columnist, first in the Sunday Times, and later with the Sun newspaper. She’s also written for the Masonic soft-porn sheet, the Daily Mail, and for the left liberal Guardian.

Britain is one of the most PC nations on earth when it comes to racism. Making even mildly disparaging remarks about non-whites, Jews, or Muslims can land you in jail, but conversely, mocking the Germans as humourless sadists, the French as cowards, or the Irish as stupid feckless drunks, is positively encouraged by the Zio-cultural commissars.

Virulently anti-Catholic TV shows like “Father Ted” (still running on primetime on mainstream TV channels in Britain and Ireland 20 years after ceasing production) reflect the intense ethnic and religious hatred at the heart of the British cultural establishment (and its MI5 controlled “Irish” counterpart).

“Zio-Hollywood” makes a Catholic bashing blockbuster film on average once every two or three years—”Philomena”, “Spotlight”, “The Magdalen Sisters” etc.,—and garlands these productions with Oscars and Oscar nominations galore.

Even films with no ostensible religious theme are often thinly disguised vehicles for anti-Catholic propaganda, e.g., “The Legend Of Tarzan”, “Elizabeth”, “Pirates Of The Caribbean”, etc.

The ostensible paradox of the Anglo-Saxonist jingoist as “anti-racist” PC zealot is not really a paradox at all, but reflects the anti-western, anti-Christian hatred at the heart of Anglo-masonry.

In the centuries since the Reformation, Anglo-Protestant imperialism and Jewish supremacism, far from opposing each other, formed an enduring alliance, which found organised expression in occult societies like the Skull and Bones, the Round Table, Bohemian Grove, and the daddy of them all, the Freemasons (not to mention Masonry’s numerous offshoots, the Know Nothings, the Orange Order, Purple Arch, etc.).

It is no coincidence that the rabidly anti-Catholic Know Nothing movement, which terrorised Irish and German Catholics in 19th century America, was led by Jewish supremacists, Charles Lewis Levin and Samuel Kramer, or that Lord George Gordon, the instigator of the anti-Catholic Gordon Riots in 18th century London, later converted to Orthodox Judaism.

George Benjamin, the first Canadian Jewish Member of Parliament, belonged to the anti-Catholic Anglo-Israelist Orange Order.

Underscoring the unspoken alliance between Zionist sponsored multiculturalism and Anglo-Masonry, British Orange terrorist groups such as the Ulster Defence Association and the Ulster Volunteer Force, have a 25-year history of trafficking illegal immigrants to the Irish Republic.

Faustus conjures up fallen angel Mephistophilis. The Faustus character, from whom we get “Faustian bargain”, is believed to have been based on John Dee. (1620 printing of Marlowe’s Doctor Faustus.

John Dee, the occult magician at the court of Elizabeth I, was apparently the first person to coin the term “British Empire”, so from the very get go the Empire was an occult cabalist project—all its main propagandists, and indeed actors, being occultists of one sort or another.

According to Stuart Piggot’s book The Druids, Dee “grew up surrounded by the controversy and currents” of what became known as the British Empire—and “sought to merge the Arthurian Imperial tradition with cabalistic interpretations of Hebrew scripture”.

“Dee created the concept of British Israel, which gave the British and the Jews a common racial identity, and invoked biblical prophecy to show the inevitable triumph of British imperialism, the British as Abraham’s seed were to inherit the earth.”

Far from being simply an ethnocentric take on Biblical Christianity, Dee’s pseudo-genealogical supremacist theory was steeped in pagan druidism, being “Christian” only in the sense that New Age pantheism is “Christian”, i.e., it co-opted elements of Christian doctrine and ritual, the better to insinuate itself almost effortlessly into the mainstream of British Christian life.

Dee’s contemporary, the celebrated Elizabethan poet Edmund Spenser, laid out a manifesto for British occult imperialism in his epic poem The Faerie Queene, which called for the ruthless crushing of Irish Catholics, the forcible imposition of the English language in Ireland, and the practice of incest among the English.

Two centuries later, another mouthpiece for Anglo-Judaeo Masonry, Marx’s sidekick, Friedrich Engels, gleefully predicted the wiping out of “whole races of reactionaries”—e.g., the Gaels, the Basques, the Slavs etc.,—in the cause of “progress”.

Zionists talk endlessly of the Holocaust, and Anglo white nats counter by invoking the genocidal Ukrainian Holodomor, but neither side dare mention the deliberate forcible starvation of Irish Catholics in the mid 19th century by the Masonic British government—an act of genocide that a Times of London editorial of 1848 gloated would make “the Celt as rare on the banks of the Shannon as the Redman on the banks of the Manhattan”.

Despite its occult Masonic origins and genocidal policies, Anglo-Israelism gained many adherents among British and American Protestants, who promoted the theory of the British Royal Family as the House of David, and Britain and the United States as the modern tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh respectively.

One might have expected that the Jews, the original self-designated “chosen”, would have resented the Johnny come lately Anglo pretenders to chosenness, but far from it: Jewish supremacists welcomed the claims of Anglo-Freemasonry to tribal co-ethnicity precisely because they understood that wherever it took root, Freemasonry laid waste the surrounding Christian civilization.

However, when, in the 20th century, some mostly American Anglo-Israelists rejected the Anglo-Israelist alliance with organised Jewry and embraced Christian Identitarianism, Jewish supremacists, in the shape of the Anti-Defamation League, denounced Christian Identity as an “ugly turn” away from the original noble tenets of Anglo-Israelism.

So, the avowed anti-racists of the ADL had no quarrel with Anglo-Israelists’ ultra-racist claim to be the rightful rulers of the whole world but objected when some of the Anglos sought to shut Jews out of the exclusive supremacist party. Straining at gnats indeed.

Like Zionism, Anglo-Israelism based its claims on an incoherent mixture of cod genealogy and self-fulfilling prophecy. Initially, the Anglo-Israelists touted the ancient Britons as the source of Britain’s supposed Jewish connection, but once Protestantism became associated with the nordic nations, they changed tack and refashioned the English lost tribe as Anglo-Saxon to the core .

Most reliable evidence indicates that the English share considerably more genetic heritage with the French than with the Germans, but when did facts ever get in the way of racial supremacist theories?

Benjamin Disraeli, the Jewish supremacist British Prime Minister of the mid-Victorian era, eagerly promoted Anglo-Israelism as the semi-official ideology of the British Empire—which, thanks to Jewish sponsorship, was then reaching the zenith of its power and prestige.

Borrowing heavily from Protestant theories of wealth and success as a sign of divine favour, Anglo-Israelists argued that Britain’s great power in the world proved the English were part of God’s chosen race. The logic was circular—the belief in chosenness impelled the supremacist drive to be “top nation”: the ensuing top nation status then being cited as evidence of chosen-ness.

Anglo-Israelism in the 19th century made huge inroads in the Church of England; the de facto takeover of Anglicanism by Masonic Israelists prompted Cardinal Newman to desert the English state church and convert to Catholicism.

According to The Union Jack, a 1970 book on Anglo-Israelism by ‘Helen Peters’, Anglo-Israelist Freemasonry controls all the major ‘right-wing’ Protestant churches in the United States. This helps explain why such churches have become slavish mouthpieces for Zionism and the endless war agenda of the Anglo-American Neocons on left and right.

The Union Jack argues that Anglo-Israelism and Freemasonry are synonymous, and embody the Kingdom-of-Heaven-on-Earth heresy, i.e., the idea of materialistic worldly “progress” as the ultimate goal of existence.

Though steeped in Protestant Freemasonry, Anglo-Israelism has a constituency even within the Catholic fold. The late Catholic modernist left liberal-turned Atlanticist Neocon Michael Novak touted liberal capitalism as the flower of “the English genius”, and condemned traditional Catholic teaching on usury, contraception, subsidiarity, and just war. A few years before his death, he wrote a book celebrating the New Atheism entitled No One Sees God.

Arguing, as many Ku Klux Klan types do, that the Jews have waged war against so called White Anglo Saxon Protestant culture, renders modern history utterly incomprehensible. Far from seeking to destroy Anglo-Masonic culture, the Anglo Israelist Jewish alliance strives to impose it as a one-size-fits-all model on the whole world.

Otherwise, how can one explain the triumph of English language throughout the globe? Or the rapid spread, via Masonic lodges, of the Anglo-Masonic sports of soccer (the founding meeting of the English Football Association took place in the Freemasons Arms hotel), cricket, rugby, and their derivatives, baseball and gridiron football?

By the same token, the global Zio-media’s exhaustive and largely fawning coverage of the not especially charismatic or interesting Masonic British royal family doesn’t suggest any notable Zionist antipathy towards Anglo-Masonry or its institutions.

Almost all the major currents of modernity at least partly originated in Masonic Britain: political liberalism, usurious capitalism, Fabianism, Darwinism, even Marxism.

Throughout the 20th century, the Anglo-American alliance instigated devastating wars that wiped out the last vestiges of Christendom and paved the way for the current cultural Marxist wage-slave ultra-surveilled police states of the West.

In the 21st century, the same alliance has joined forces with Islamic Wahabists and the state of Israel to overthrow Christian-friendly governments in Yugoslavia, Syria, and Iraq.

Anti-globalists like Paul Craig Roberts tend to interpret all of this as proof that Britain is America’s poodle, but the evidence suggests something closer to the opposite: that the U.S. is in fact the City of London’s muscle-bound global enforcer.

One must be careful to distinguish between the City of London (the Crown) and the United Kingdom. The Crown is not the British Windsor monarchy but rather the cabalist Masonic force which controls both the British monarchy and the British government.

Just in case British Members of British Parliament run away with the foolish idea that their deliberations matter a jot, the City of London’s representative (or “remembrancer”) sits behind the Speaker in the Westminster House of Commons to remind them who really calls the shots in the U.K.

Nevertheless, the Crown has used Anglo- Israelism—a species of gentile Zionist supremacism—to impose its homogenized globalist Anglo-centric cultural and political model on the world.

Again, it is necessary to distinguish between Anglo-Israelism and common or garden British nationalism. Not every British or English nationalist is an Anglo-Israelist, just as not every Chinese nationalist supports the Chinese Communist Party. What distinguishes Anglo-Israelism from nationalism is its relentless drive to eradicate all other national cultures. Like Zionism, it is the enemy of nationalism—even English and British nationalism, properly understood.

If every nation in Europe still spoke its own language and maintained its own traditions and economic independence, it is impossible to imagine the current immigration tsunami now overwhelming Europe ever having taken place. The British people, it should be noted, have not been spared this tsunami or the other ravages of globalism, in spite of their country being the HQ of global masonry.

Far from regarding other European races as brethren, Anglo-Israelist Masons always viewed them as enemies of the Masonic liberal Anglo-international. The Masonic British Empire sided with the Turks against Christendom, with Pagan Japan against Orthodox Christian Russia, and with radical atheist revolutionaries against Catholic European governments and their possessions in the Americas and elsewhere.

Similarly, as the late British researcher Anthony Sutton has shown, Anglo-America not only aided the Bolshevik regime in Russia but ensured its survival through huge economic, military, and technological aid.

In modern times, Anglo-Israelist Neocons in Britain extoll the idea of the multi-cultural, multi-ethnic Commonwealth over the ancient Christian nations of Europe.

Many jingoistic Masonically inclined Brexiteers absurdly tout a German/Jesuit/Vatican conspiracy as the true power behind the E.U. but never get around to explaining why, if this is so, Europe has, since the start of E.U. integration in the 1950s, been rapidly Anglicized linguistically, politically, economically, and culturally, and why Anglo-Zio-Masonic militarism—and the disastrous migration that flows from it—define modern E.U. history.

David Duke has done sterling work exposing the ludicrous hypocrisy of Zionist “anti-racists”, but framing the debate about immigration and globalism as a struggle between old-fashioned noble imperialists and evil lefty multiculturalists completely misses the point. The Masonic imperialists and the leftists were on the same side in the 19th century and they still are today.

A refutation of Michael Hoffman II

By Jude Duffy
June 29, 2017 Anno Domini

Michael Hoffman II says my comments about him posted on an article published on Henry Makow’s site are calculated to harm his “reputation as a historian”. This is provably false. Far from being “calculated”, my comments were originally a private reply to a woman who wrote to Henry taking issue with my passing reference, in another Makow piece, to Mr. Hoffman as anti-Catholic. This woman challenged me to substantiate my description of Mr. Hoffman and I did so. Henry asked me if he could publish this private reply on his site, and I agreed. So, no calculation.

However, since Mr Hoffman raises the subject, if he wishes to rebut slurs, real or imagined, on his historiographical credibility, no one is stopping him presenting all his formal academic qualifications in this discipline.

Incidentally, my original passing comment about Hoffman (and other alternative media types such as David Icke) alluded to their penchant for uncritically recycling any and all negative narratives the corporate media serve up about the Catholic Church—even though they urge their followers to treat the same media’s narratives about most other issues with contempt. Hoffman in his counter-attack has made no effort to refute this criticism.

Nor has he addressed my point about why he condones the media’s unrelenting efforts to portray clerical sexual abuse of minors as a uniquely Catholic crime. This co-ordinated hate campaign is one of the great media scandals of our time (as some Protestants and even some atheists have acknowledged), yet Hoffman promotes it very enthusiastically in his writings.

Only a few days ago, an item appeared on British Sky News relating to Peter Ball—former Anglican bishop and close friend of the heir to the British throne, Prince Charles—who has been convicted of multiple counts of sexual abuse of minors. The report stated that the former head of the Church of England, Archbishop of Canterbury George Carey, had been ordered by the current Archbishop of Canterbuy, Justin Welby, to cut all formal ties with the Church of England, because of his role in covering up the crimes of Bishop Ball.

In addition to being the former head of the worldwide Anglican Communion, Carey sits in the British House of Lords and is still a prominent figure in British public life, so this was by any standards a huge story. If it had related to a former Catholic bishop found guilty of sexual abuse, and a former head of the Catholic Church in England found to have covered up his crimes, it would have made front-page news, not just in the U.K. but also around the world. The ultra-Zionist New York Times would have devoted endless column inches to it, and the usual oligarch-funded and directed cultural Marxist groups would have staged noisy protests outside Westminster Catholic Cathedral.

Even the self-styled traditionalist Catholic movement would have jumped on the bandwagon, showering the corporate media with sycophantic garlands for “exposing the sickening corruption at the heart of the post-conciliar Church”.

Yet not only was this story not the main headline on Sky News, it didn’t even merit its own report from a religious affairs or legal affairs correspondent.

Furthermore, Sky News chose to downplay Peter Ball’s crimes by referring to them as the ‘abuse of young men’, when the victims were in fact teenage boys. Over 80 per cent of the victims of Catholic clerics convicted of sexual abuse were in the same age range as Ball’s victims (or the ones he has been convicted of – he has also been accused of abusing younger children). Yet the media invariably refer to Catholic clerical abuse of teenagers as ‘paedophilia’, ‘child abuse’, or the ‘rape of children’.

Needless to say, and regardless of the culprit, there can be no question of minimising the horror of the crime of homosexual abuse of teenagers, but the anti-Catholic vendetta of the media is discernible even in the different language corporate presstitutes use to describe equivalent crimes—depending on the religious denomination of the perpetrator.

Underscoring this vendetta, the Daily Mail, a vile pornographic propaganda organ of the British-Masonic establishment, in its report on the Ball scandal, repeatedly referred to Bishop Ball as a ‘priest’, a term that in Britain usually denotes members of the Catholic clergy.

Mr. Hoffman of course never has anything to say about this whitewashing of the crimes of Protestant clergy, because, quite demonstrably, he shares the Zionist media’s hatred of the Catholic Church.

He repeatedly insists it is only the post-Renaissance Church he objects to, but unless he is exceedingly dense, he must know that the Catholic Church has never held that her divinely guaranteed indefectibility would run out after a given period of history—quite the reverse. If the Church is not indefectible now, she has never been indefectible. And if she had never been indefectible, she would have been as much a fraud in the Middle Ages as she is now—according to Mr. Hoffman’s logic. He really must choose.

Moreover, Mr. Hoffman once again refuses to answer the crucial question as to what religious authority he deems worthy of obedience in the here and now. Does he believe that in today’s world every Christian must decide for himself on the great moral issues of our time? That is the definition of Protestantism—and liberalism

Hoffman challenges me to substantiate my claim that he admires Cromwell. This is extraordinary. In his writings he has repeatedly sought to downplay the Judaizing tendencies of Cromwell and the Puritans. Indeed, to read much of what he writes on this subject, one could be forgiven for assuming that the Jacobites had triumphed in the religious and political conflicts of 17th century Britain (see for example one of his most recent pieces on this subject ‘The Great Divide’ – May 2. 2017).

One doesn’t have to be a fan of the Stuarts (I’m not) to recognise the utter absurdity of placing the blame for Britain’s emergence as a usurious capitalist superpower on that dynasty—akin to blaming the Romanovs for the ills of the Soviet Union. Quite simply, Catholics were a defeated and persecuted minority in the days when usurious capitalism became the dominant economic system throughout the U.K. and its colonies.

If British Protestants had the aversion to usury that Hoffman attributes to them, they had ample opportunity to combat this vice from a position of enormous strength, as they held uncontested power in Britain and its possessions throughout the late 17th century, the 18th century, and the 19th century. As it was, usurious capitalism went from strength to strength in the era of Protestant hegemony.

The United Kingdom has never had a Catholic Prime Minister and hasn’t had a Catholic monarch since the days of the Stuarts. The United States only got its first Catholic President in 1960, and he was only deemed a worthy candidate when he promised not to let his faith govern his political decisions.

And he got shot.

The incontestable fact is that Protestants were ‘early adopters’ of usurious capitalism. Many of the founders of the Bank of England were Huguenots—as was its first governor Sir John Houblon. Even in the predominantly Catholic countries of France and Italy, Protestants dominated usurious banking—something their religious descendants still acknowledge today.

The same applies, incidentally, to Freemasonry. Hoffman dismisses the many papal condemnations of Freemasonry as a smokescreen to hide the real agenda of the “Romanists”, just as he dismisses papal condemnations of usury. On the other hand, he ignores the indisputable and very concrete links between the Protestant churches and Masonry, e.g., Anglican and Lutheran archbishops’ and bishops’ membership of the Freemasons.

So, in Hoffman’s bizarre counter-intuitive form of historiography, binding papal encyclicals can be dismissed as charades, whereas irrefutable evidence of Masonic domination of Protestant churches is deemed irrelevant in assessing the merits of these denominations.

Hoffman doesn’t appear to worry unduly either about Calvin’s openly stated support for usury, Luther’s admiration for occult alchemy, his proto-modernist attempts to edit the Bible to his own taste, and his exhortation to his followers to “sin boldly”.

Nor does Hoffman get around to explaining why, if the radical Protestants of past centuries were such upstanding folk, most mainline Protestant churches now support abortion, homosexuality, and why even most of the more conservative Protestant denominations endorse birth prevention and promote Israel First ultra-Zionism.

He largely ignores, too, the Protestant Anglo-Israelist origins of corrupt occult societies such as the Orange Order, Purple Arch, the Black Preceptory, Skull and Bones, and Scroll and Key—most of which flourished in the radical Protestant heartlands of northern Ireland, Scotland, New England, and the British colonies. Instead, he focuses all his moral outrage about the degeneracy of modern institutional Christianity on the Catholic Church.

For someone who takes such offence at criticism of his own stated views, Hoffman falsely attributes statements to his critics with reckless abandon. He says I claimed that usury “began” with Protestants. I would never say anything so absurd. Usury didn’t begin with Protestants or “Romanists”; it has always existed. I did say that Hoffman has attempted to whitewash Protestantism’s role in the rise of usury, and he has made no attempt to refute this charge.

Hoffman calls my speculation about the reasons for his admiration for Luther, Calvin, et al., “Freudian drivel”. Actually if I had to write the piece again, I’d leave out the last bit about Hoffman’s possible motives for lionising Protestant leaders and Puritans—not because it’s in any way far-fetched to speculate that he may have fallen prey to romantic hero-worship—a much more plausible hypothesis than his own outlandish claim that the popes were secretly promoting Freemasonry while pretending to condemn it. No, the reason I’d omit this final paragraph is because, with hindsight, I think it gives Hoffman too much credit, and may falsely imply a nuanced outlook on his part about religious matters, where no such nuance or balance exists. Regardless of his motives, of which I obviously have no certain knowledge, Hoffman’s writings about the Church are quite simply the work of a crude anti-Catholic propagandist.

Incidentally, the only reason I even added the last bit is because Henry Makow, being a magnanimous sort of chap, asked me if I’d care to balance my criticisms of Hoffman with something positive. That was the context in which I wrote what I did about Hoffman’s piece on Bing Crosby and Irving Berlin. However his views on the Old Crooner notwithstanding, Hoffman’s anti-Catholic bigotry is beyond reasonable dispute in my view.

The bullish New York attorney Roy Cohn was the quintessential false-opposition operative working under Senator Joseph McCarthy. He prosecuted and persecuted communists, as part of the establishment-controlled red scare, as well as homosexuals, despite being a homosexual himself. But how he was so successful, achieving a huge amount of federal indictments as McCarthy’s aide and attorney for the U.S. Department of Justice, was likely due to a dirty, dark secret of his: sexual blackmail, especially of the pedophile kind. Biographer Burton Hersh reveals about Cohn,

“…When New York attorney John Klotz began to investigate Roy Cohn on behalf of a client…declassified New York government files and spadework by a private detective substantiated the allegation that there was indeed a ‘blue suite’ at the Plaza, Suite 233. ‘Roy Cohn was providing protection,’ Klotz discovered. ‘There were a bunch of pedophiles involved. That’s where Cohn got his power from—blackmail.’”[i]

Plaza Hotel, site of room 233, where Roy Cohn may have held underage sex parties in order to blackmail elites.

Not only was Cohn tied to the Nebraska GOP pederast ring (Franklin scandal), as we discovered in Part II of this series, Cohn was involved in a New York City sex ring, run out of a Manhattan hotel that eventually became owned by Cohn’s protégé Donald J. Trump in 1988. Had Trump himself been compromised by Cohn in suite 233 with some child prostitute, not unlike the way Trump’s friend Jeffrey Epstein would compromise elites at his “Lolita Island”? Katie Johnson, who was only 13 years old at the time, claims to have been lured to one of Epstein’s underage sex parties in New York, where she was violently raped by Trump?[ii]

“(Detective James) Rothstein had an opportunity to have a sit-down with infamous McCarthy committee counsel Roy Cohn. During this sit-down, Cohn admitted to Rothstein that he was part of a rather elaborate sexual blackmail operation that compromised politicians with child prostitutes (Rothstein, no pagination). Cohn told Rothstein that this operation was being carried out as part of the anticommunist crusade of the time (no pagination).[iii]

There doesn’t seem to be any proof that Cohn had compromised Trump, although we do know that Trump followed in the footsteps of Cohn, even assuming his bullish demeanor, as well as the two exchanging favors for years up until Trump abandoned his friend after it was revealed publicly that he had AIDS.

“I hear Roy in the things he says quite clearly,” said Peter Fraser, who as Mr. Cohn’s lover for the last two years of his life spent a great deal of time with Mr. Trump. “That bravado, and if you say it aggressively and loudly enough, it’s the truth — that’s the way Roy used to operate to a degree, and Donald was certainly his apprentice.”[iv]

Cohn (left) with protégé Donald J. Trump (right).

Convict Jeffrey Epstein continued this illuministic spirit pioneered by Cohn in the New York underworld in the ring he appeared to have run, in connection with Trump’s Mar-A-Lago resort, which was apparently a proving ground for would-be sex slaves. And the whole notion of anti-communism as saving America was the convenient bait used in a basic Hegelian dialectical system. Cohn was vice president of rabbi George Sokolsky’s political action committee, the American Jewish League Against Communism (this league officially endorsed the Jewish-controlled John Birch Society, which has tentacles all over the alt right). Not only did Cohn’s sex ring help him advance his legal career, it helped him advance Jewish interests, specifically its capitalist dialectic in the West.

Pedophile book on Cohn’s sex ring stashed at Watergate?

Could the Watergate burglars have been after a pedophile book that contained the names of Cohn’s sexually compromised Republican Party and New York elites, which may have included Donald Trump’s name?

Watergate Hotel.

“[Detective] Rothstein also had an opportunity to speak to infamous Watergate burglar Frank Sturgis. During this conversation, Sturgis revealed one of the reasons for breaking into the Watergate. According to Sturgis, there was a “Pedophile Book” hidden away at the Democratic National Committee headquarters (no pagination). The book was supposed to have a list of pedophiles on the American political scene (no pagination).”[v]

This alleged book, no doubt, would have had dirt on Democrats, too.

“Fugitive ex-CIA officer Frank Terpil has claimed that sexual blackmailing operations directed by the CIA were intensive in Washington during the Watergate era (DeCamp 179). Terpil also asserts that his former partner, Ed Wilson, was coordinating one of these sexual blackmail operations (179). In a letter to author Jim Hougan, Terpil revealed Wilson’s modus operandi:

‘“Historically, one of Wilson’s Agency jobs was to subvert members of both houses [of Congress] by any means necessary…. Certain people could be easily coerced by living out their sexual fantasies in the flesh…. A remembrance of these occasions [was] permanently recorded via selected cameras…. The technicians in charge of filming… were TSD [Technical Services Division of the CIA]. The unwitting porno stars advanced in their political careers, some of [whom] may still be in office.” (Qtd. in DeCamp 179)’”

According to John DeCamp, Wilson’s ring was a continuation of Cohn’s.[vi]

CIA counter-intelligence director James Jesus Angleton proved to be such a loyal asset to Israel and its Mossad that he was honoured with a monument in Israel. (Source: Michael Collins Piper, The Final Judgment)

Late journalist and author Michael Collins Piper makes a good case for the Watergate scandal actually being orchestrated by Israel’s Mossad to take down Nixon—in a continuation of a takedown of those in the JFK administration still working in government.[vii] Interestingly, James Jesus Angleton, Mossad’s top ally in the CIA and alleged architect of the deliberately botched Watergate burglary apparently had sexually compromising photos of Cohn associate 33rd degree freemason J. Edgar Hoover.

“Author Anthony Summers, in his recently-released biography of former FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover, described how the alleged compromising photos of Hoover engaged in homosexual activities (described in Chapter 7) managed to surface in relation to the Garrison investigation.”

According to Summers, he was told by former CIA contract operative Gordon Novel that he (Novel) was shown such photos by James J. Angleton.”[viii]

Piper illustrates how it was Jewish mob boss Meyer Lansky who spearheaded the blackmail of homosexual Hoover.

“Summers created a media sensation when he alleged in his new biography of Hoover, Official and Confidential, and on the PBS series “Frontline,” that Lansky blackmailed Hoover with supposed photos of Hoover engaged in homosexual activity.”[ix]

Could Lansky and his associates have directed Cohn’s sex ring? Hoover is alleged to have been witnessed dressed up drag with two young boys at the Plaza Hotel. Could it have been at Cohn’s Room 233 pedophile hangout?

Daily Mail lies about Trump rape accuser following convenient dropping of her lawsuit

Alleged Trump rape victim Katie Johnson (right) when she was in her early teens.

A week before the U.S. federal election, Katie Johnson, the woman who filed a lawsuit alleging that Donald Trump raped her when she was 13 at an Epstein sex party in New York, cancelled a press conference, at which she was to reveal her identity (the conference would precede the approaching pre-trial in December of this year). On November 2, Johnson’s legal representative, Los Angeles civil rights attorney Lisa Bloom, told a press scrum at her Woodland Hills, Los Angeles offices that Johnson would not be appearing due to fear of her life following threats.

“I have bad news. Jane Doe has received numerous threats today as have all the Trump accusers that I have represented.”[x]

Then, only three days before the election, Johnson withdrew her lawsuit against the would-be President of the United States and his longtime friend Jewish billionaire and convicted child sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein, who raped Johnson and other young girls while having them play out role-playing fantasies, exactly as the aforementioned Terpil explains about the CIA’s blackmail techniques.

Katie Johnson today.

That the dropping of the suit was a huge convenience for Trump and his eventual election goes without saying. Johnson’s deposition stated that Trump and Epstein threatened her life and those of the other child victims if they were to reveal the crime. It appears that, with this decades’ old threat, they finally got to Johnson and her lawyer in time for the election.

The mainstream media was mysteriously silent on the Johnson lawsuit, with the Daily Mail being the main conduit to disseminate information to the public regarding the case. The Daily Mail’s last article on the Johnson-Trump rape scandal was published on Nov. 7, 2016, the eve of the election, with the deceptive headline of “EXCLUSIVE: Troubled woman with a history of drug use who claimed that she was assaulted by Donald Trump at a Jeffrey Epstein sex party at age 13 MADE IT ALL UP”.[xi] Notice that the writer of the article headline used all upper case letters for the lie they told. This despite that the article never conclusively proves that she made up her story. No where does Johnson say she made anything up, yet the Daily Mail crafted this politically-motivated, click-baiting headline to suggest otherwise. The Mail also slanted the story to suggest that Johnson’s claims were that of a drug-riddled, troubled person. If this is true, it is not an uncommon result for rape victims. In truth, the Daily Mail was counting on people reading only the dismissive headline rather than reading the article and weighing the evidence and deciding for themselves. Reading on in that article, there is very scant evidence from a conveniently anonymous source that Johnson made up her story. Furthermore, the Daily Mail itself spoke with Epstein procurer “Tiffany” who corroborated Johnson’s entire story, which just happens to corroborate Virginia Roberts proven claims against Epstein. It seems the Daily Mail was given a last-minute directive (by Mossad?) to exonerate Trump, thus the Mail’s sudden and unsubstantiated dismissal of Johnson’s claims. Ironically, child-sex procurer Ghislaine Maxwell’s Mossad-asset father Robert Maxwell controlled much of Britain’s media at one time. It’s likely that Britain’s media, today, is still in similar hands, thus the dramatic U-turn by the Daily Mail in the Johnson case.

Adding to the disinformation surrounding this case is the double standard held by Trump supporters and the pseudo alternative media. Rape allegations—all of them—against Bill and Hillary Clinton are fair game but any against Trump are off limits.

Pizzagate: Interference play or further down the rabbit hole

The spurious “Anonymous” is believed to have started the Pizzagate conspiracy theory.

Shortly before the U.S. federal election, image-board discussion group 4 Chan, Reddit, and the highly suspicious “anonymous” is alleged to have broken an elite Washington DC child-sex scandal dubbed “Pizzagate”.[xii] Of course, it only involves democrats, even though the GOP has a history with child sex rings, like the aforementioned Franklin scandal in Nebraska and Washington DC. It’s too early to determine right now the veracity of this conspiracy theory; however, those in conspiracy circles have completely bought into the theory blindly without investigating too deeply. There are inconsistencies in the story.[xiii] The fact that the story was automatically believed shows the mindset of Trump supporters and those on the alt right. They are as controlled as their opponents on the left, who also believe anything spoon-fed to them by Leftist talking heads.

The timing of the release of this scandal, thanks to Wikileaks hacked/leaked emails, is also suspect, as the rape case against Trump was gaining momentum as well as articles like mine showing Trump (and Clinton’s) connections child-sex ring of Jeffrey Epstein and his Mossad asset Ghislaine Maxwell. The right wing has had no interest in Wikileaks up until Trump announced his running for president, at which point Wikileaks seemed to suddenly shift its focus against the Democrats. Time and thorough investigation will reveal wether Pizzagate is legitimate or merely a distraction. There is also the possibility that Pizzagate is true but is limited hangout. Or, perhaps, Pizzagate is connected to Epstein and his Mossad-run child-sex ring.

“Limited hangout” is intelligence jargon for a form of propaganda in which a selected portion of a scandal, criminal act, sensitive or classified information, etc. is revealed or leaked, without telling the whole story. The intention may be to establish credibility as a critic of something or somebody by engaging in criticism of them while in fact covering up for them by omitting many details; to distance oneself publicly from something using innocuous or vague criticism even when ones own sympathies are privately with them; or to divert public attention away from a more heinous act by leaking information about something less heinous. —Rational Wiki

From Paul Joseph Watson to Stefan Molyneux, Donald Trump to Milo Yiannopoulos, the rising secular “right wing” in the Americas, dubbed the “alt right” by some, shares one common narrative that reveals it as the limited hangout, controlled-opposition operation that it is.

Omission of the Jewish-Masonic question.

It is completely absent from any meaningful discourse of every single alt right personality, despite that the Jewish question lurks behind all of the revolutionary movements that have conspired against the West and Christian mores for the last 2,000 years to the present time. With the rise of U.S. presidential candidate Donald Trump, his perceived populism, and the growing backlash to political correctness, the alt right has sprung up all too quickly, all too conveniently as those disillusioned with the radical leftist world takeover grapple for answers. Right on cue, the controlled-opposition agents have filled in the gaps and have “answered” our questions in a manner that leaves out the more damning, darker truth.

The legitimate right, those identifying with traditional, Hellenic-Christian culture, appear completely oblivious to this hijacking of the right, much in the same way past controlled opposition garnered favour with the right only to later lead it down a dead-end road or, worse, to slaughter.

All the way down the line, the new alt right talking heads have acted as gatekeepers for the Judeo-Masonic establishment. Take for example Stefan Molyneux and his recent example of excusing Jewish over-representation in positions of influence, Paul Joseph Watson’s laughable denial of Jewish influence anywhere in the world, Alex Jones’ playing limited hangout 20-years plus (defending freemasonry, at times allowing for mild, superficial criticism of Israel but omitting the bigger issues regarding Israel and Judaism), or Donald Trump’s total subservience to the Israel lobby and Judaism (AIPAC, Jewish staffers, Zionist foreign policy position, all his kids either married to or dating Jews). Homosexual alt right icon Milo Yiannopoulos, although a more honest Jew (he has admitted Jewish influence in the world), also serves to advance the controlled right’s agenda of Jewish omission by displacing bigger issues with smaller ones (for example, restricting immigration would require kicking all of the Jewish policymakers and their ilk off of the policy boards and replacing them with populists; shallowly criticizing unfettered immigration solves little).

More Jewish alt right gatekeepers
While I appreciate the many truths spoken by alt right talking heads like Breitbart (founded by Jew Andrew Breitbart), homosexual Jew Matt Drudge (Drudge Report), Ezra Levant (Jewish), Lauren Southern (Rebel Media), or the aforementioned personalities, their agenda is, at best, a half measure solution to the world’s problem, at worst, leading the right to its ultimate destruction. They, like CIA front National Review and the John Birch Society, discuss very real issues but are there to homogenize the right whilst omitting the issues that reveal the entire truth—and in that complete truth wherein lies real solutions for the world’s greatest dilemma (incidentally, the National Review has condemned the alt right as racist and anti-Semitic). The only effective method for containing the Judeo-Masonic dilemma has been the Byzantine Solution, or the Vatican’s Sicut Judaeis Non, which would have to be expanded to include freemasonry and its many gnostic offshoots.

Infowars’ Alex Jones is sort of the pioneer of 21st century limited hangout. He was doing it on an international stage long before the current alt right talking heads became as popular as they. It’s only because of Donald Trump and growing public disillusionment with the left that there is a need for a pantheon of limited hangout agents, who have now surpassed Jones in notoriety. Jones, apparently, was the beta test for the establishment’s plan for a rise of the pseudo right.

White nationalists appear to have completely bought into the alt right bait, with personalities like David Duke and Professor Kevin MacDonald riding the Trump, alt right bandwagon; although, MacDonald has demonstrated his awareness of the Jewish involvement in the alt right and is supporting it anyways likely for strategic reasons. White nationalist opposition to Judeo-Masonry has proven itself a failure (National Socialism) and is based in racialism. Only the Church has adequately addressed and dealt with the question. Any notion of the “true” alt right being hijacked from the supposed rightful heir white nationalists by Milo types is ridiculous. Neither of the two groups are the rightful heirs.

This alt right and its friendly alternative media are not allowing any other talking points to the reach the masses. Right wing sentiment must not deviate from what the establishment has set out. Dissenting views from the alt right narrative are regarded as divisive, anti-Trump, leftist, or they are simply ignored (dynamic silence). The alt right is a neocon of the necons—its controlled outgrowth that is a false attempt at a return to conservatism. The only true conservatism is one based not in secular populism but in Jesus Christ and the moral order.

New Atlantis (the American republic), the masonic ambition of Kabbalist Sir Francis Bacon and his fellow occultists.

Is Alex Jones playing a sleight of hand or his he really that dumb regarding freemasonry?

The word magician looks to be back to his game of revelation of the method. On October 16, 2015, Jones posted a clip from his show under the click-baiting headline of “Alex Jones Reveals His Deep Masonic Roots”. Sounds like something one of his critics would say, right? In the clip, Jones claims that he is not a mason but then goes on to brag of his ‘deep masonic roots’. Thereafter, Jones talks about how most masons are just dupes of a hijacked freemasonry and don’t really know its true Enlightenment (good) source, the kind embraced by America’s founders like George Washington. The show then ends with a sales pitch for some 1776 T-shirts glorifying the masonic U.S. founding fathers.

Jones is behaving consistently. He has always advocated masonic, Enlightenment principles throughout his public career, mainly under the themes of capitalism, Protestantism, and libertarianism. The only difference is that now he is not masking it. In the video clip, he even used the word “illuminati” in a positive context and glorifies the Rosicrucians. He says his family are from the “real Illuminati”. I guess the dumbfounded viewer is supposed to take away from it that freemasonry and illuminism are good and true, it’s just that “globalists” have hijacked its concepts and symbols, thus constituting a fake illuminati. As I outlined in one of my early critiques of Jones, this is the pattern used by the conspirators—to first withhold their agenda from their target (secrecy) and then gradually leak their secrets through the mass media, art, and culture (revelation). The purpose of gradual revelation is so that the target is not alarmed. Then, by the time the target has figured out that they are in the midst of an assault, it will have been too late. Most likely, though, the target will not figure any of it out. And with no alarm, there is no need to cease the new learned behaviour, the new way of thinking. In other words, the target internalizes the commands of its conspirators and champions its own destruction.

Jones is aligning his audience to the Judeo-masonic worldview, which is contrary to everyone’s best interests, except the conspirators’. It’s sold as human enlightenment, progress, and higher evolution.

The anti-Christ agenda of History Channel and its Ancient Aliens television series is reaching new depths by endorsing freemasonry and crediting our supposed alien creators for enlightening mankind with masonic principles.

Now in the advanced stages of its propaganda campaign against Christ and His Church, Ancient Aliens is moving past its phase of using pseudo-archaeology to show how aliens have always been with us to now fully embracing Satanic black arts, including divination, geomancy, mathemancy, and Jewish magic (kabbalism), which is the foundation of freemasonry. An overwhelming number of episodes revolve around divination and sorcery, where supposed great minds like Albert Einstein, kabbalist Isaac Newton, Leonardo da Vinci, and freemason George Washington are depicted as receiving their wisdom and leadership through an infusion of alien knowledge and guidance. To those familiar with the teachings of the Church and the Fathers, this is nothing new. Magicians have been receiving secret knowledge from demons and/or fallen angels since the Middle Ages and beyond. Of course, the Ancient Aliens narrative blurs any correlation here and instead spins the story to suit its theme that space aliens created us through some kind of co-evolution involving genetic modification—an occult concept in itself (transmutation, pursuit of androgyny, etc.)—and have been cryptically trying to tell us of our origins through the various cultural myths and religions.

The following episodes drive home the aforementioned kind of propaganda, at times even overtly crediting freemasonry and its divinators with bringing alien knowledge to mankind and making the world a better place. The episodes even interview leading masonic authorities, like Past Grand Master of The Grand Lodge of Washington Akram Elias, who are more than happy to lend credibility to the show and its deceptive agenda:

As you can see, Satan and his fallen co-conspirators have been busy at the studios of the History Channel. I have only listed the episodes which focus on masonic themes specifically; however, almost every show slips in some kind of masonic propaganda. The most diabolical of the above episodes is by far The Satan Conspiracy, in which the show’s cast of clowns—Girogio Tsoukalos, David Childress, David Wilcock, et al.—defend Satan and the bad reputation he received while innocently trying to enlighten Eve with knowledge and trash the Christian God for withholding knowledge from mankind. This is an almost verbatim masonic explanation of what happened in Genesis. Ancient Aliens portrays the Bible as if it does not claim exclusivity to truth, after which it can propagate the masonic heresy of indifferentism. Once the show’s “experts” have deconstructed the belief in absolute truth in the psyche of the television viewer, they can then construct their space alien co-evolution theory in its place.

New Ager David Wilcock reveals the masonic liberal agenda of the Ancient Aliens cult in Aliens and the Civil War saying:

It’s possible that extraterrestrials have been visiting America since its foundation and have been, in fact, steering the outcome this whole time, and why might they want to do that? You would want to see society moving in a direction of greater freedom, greater openness, greater acceptance so that in time this allows them to have a much more warm welcome than they otherwise would have.

Wilcock sounds like an LGTBQ activist, doesn’t he? He’s right about one thing, the fallen angels (Wilcock’s aliens) were likely guiding the U.S. Founding Fathers as they set up the new masonic, libertarian republic.

It appears that Ancient Aliens producer Kevin Burns is Jewish. If so, it’s no surprise that the series is advocating anti-Christ Jewish magic in the forms of kabbalism and freemasonry. Add “Rabbi” Ariel Bar Tzadok (who appears to totally endorse the show’s theme) to the cast of regular “expert guests” and you have a 100%-certified kosher piece of propaganda. A&E, which distributes Ancient Aliens on the History Channel almost daily and just happens to run marathon reruns of the show on Christian holy days, is owned by the Jewish-controlled Hearst and Disney corporations. A&E Chairman Nancy Raven (Ravnitsky) is believed to be Jewish as well.

While agents of the Jewish-Masonic cryptocracy work around the clock spreading lies and disinformation, many sincere people are getting sucked into their traps. One of the fastest spreading fallacies of these agents is the conspiracy theory that the Catholic Church—through the Society of Jesus (Jesuits), the Pope, and/or the supposedly still-existing Knights Templars—are running the New World Order conspiracy.

“It’s not the Jews!” these agents and their naïve dupes claim. “We have been fooled for the last 400 years into thinking the Jews are leading the NWO when it’s really the Jesuits, the Vatican, and the Black Pope!”

The game of these agenturs is very simple. Everything that has been typically attributed to Jews for hundreds of years, for example, the creation of the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion, the drafting of the Satanic Babylonian Talmud, and even Zionism itself, are all the work of the Jesuits. It’s a rewriting of history. Take every historical book from the last 2,000 years that names “Jews,” cross it out, and replace it with “Catholics” or some euphemistic term that indicts the Church and you have the Jesuit conspiracy meme summed up.

From attributing the creation of Zionism to an excommunicated Jesuit named Franciso Ribera to blaming the rise of Hitler and Nazism on the Church, there is no place the Jesuit memers won’t go. It borders on clownish with absurd claims that the Jesuits sunk the Titanic, created Islam, and assassinated John F. Kennedy. Of course, the grand proof they present of this alleged Jesuit conspiracy is Jewish Adam Weishaupt’s (founder of the Bavarian Order of the Illuminati) education under the Jesuits—something these Jesuit memers almost always bring up. Hypocrisy runs deep among these anti-Catholics, as they say in one breath that it is wrong to blame one group of people (especially Jews) and in the next breath they blame all the world’s problems on the Church. These clowns must have low regard for their audience for them to believe their blatant double standard goes unnoticed.

One hand tied behind the backBefore I go on here, I want to point out that this is not to absolve the Catholic Church of clerical abuses and legitimate corruption within it. And, of course, there is the heretical Second Vatican Council that has been foisted upon Catholics, which further maligns the legitimate faith and demonizes (at least in Protestant eyes) Catholics in general. This council is the handcuff that has one hand of the Church behind its back—done so that She would not be able to defend herself against the Judeo-Masonic onslaught going on. With the Church on the ropes, so to speak, the Jesuit meme is a sucker punch.

*a note on semantics

MemeI would define a meme as the mindless replication or imitation of a concept or idea, especially a false one. Much of the popularity of the Jesuit meme is due to dupes, especially in conspiracy circles, who mindlessly accept, without verifying, the Jesuit meme and then replicate it.

Proponents of the Jesuit conspiracy memeBased on their worldview, the Jesuit conspiracy meme is a convenient scapegoat and tool of self-deception for several groups, including but not limited to:

Jewish groups, Zionists (Jewish and Protestant)

Seventh Day Adventists

COINTELPRO

New or naïve conspiracy researchers

New Agers

Evangelicals, fundamentalist Protestants, Calvinists

Freemasons, Enlightenment thinkers

Catholic haters

The idea that Jews are running the NWO is rather inconvenient for them and exposes them for what they are. You would be hard pressed to find a Jesuit memer who is the slightest bit anti-Zionist. Many of them also happen to endorse other irregular conspiracy theories, like that of “reptilians” and “death fakers”. Then there are some who pretend to be anti-Zionist but with the appendage that the Vatican is really behind the Zionists. The fact of the matter is, the idea that there exists a Judeo-Masonic conspiracy has been a cultural belief for hundreds of years; whereas the Jesuit conspiracy is the counter-culture belief, in other words, the revolutionary belief. Furthermore, the Judeo-Masonic conspiracy theory has a huge amount of evidence behind it while the Jesuit theory has next to none. Jesuit theorists count on memetic replication, because if one actually checks their claims against recorded history, they theorists will be revealed as frauds.

Key individuals promoting the Jesuit conspiracy meme

Alexander Hislop (rabid anti-Catholic Protestant)

Malachi Martin (Vatican infiltrator paid by the American Jewish Committee)

The RCC created the Bavarian Order of the Illuminati through Jesuit-trained (actually a converso) Adam Weishaupt

The RCC published (created?) the Babylonian Talmud

The RCC created the Nazis and is responsible for all anti-Semitism

The Jesuits are behind the CIA, Federal Reserve, and communism

The Jesuits ignited the French and Russian revolutions

Basics of the Jesuit meme: The Black PopeThe Jesuit theorists claim that the head of the Jesuits, the Superior General, is the “Black Pope”—one whose power supersedes that of the Pope and, subsequently, the Holy Church. This Black Pope and his Jesuits are said to be leading the New World Order conspiracy; although, none of the Jesuit memers can give a clear explanation as to what the Jesuits’ supposed goal of world domination is and why they seek this. In contrast, with the Judeo-Masonic conspiracy theory, the goal is quite clearly the overthrow of Christianity and Western Civilization. With the New World Order, regardless of who one think is leading it, it’s clear to anyone that the NWO conspiracy is attempting to dismantle all religions, especially Christianity. So, why would the supposed leaders of that conspiracy, the Jesuits, be working to destroy their own Christian-based institution? If one says the Jesuits are not Christian in the first place and this is why they are leading the NWO to destroy religion and Christianity, then one has to admit that either a). the Catholic Church also is not a Christian institution (which would require a whole new set of evidence and proof), or b). the Jesuits are saboteurs of the Catholic Church and Christianity in general. If one answers with “a”, then the root of the problem is not the Jesuits but the Catholic Church itself, since the Catholic Church predates the Jesuits. But the Jesuit memers don’t focus on this. The focus is all on the Jesuits. This is the clearest evidence that they have other motives for propagating this theory. Now, if the answer is “b”, then we can speculate as to who is really behind the Jesuits, since it couldn’t be the Catholic Church itself. Seeing as the first Jesuits were overrepresented with Jews and a Jew, one Ignatius Loyola, founded the Jesuits, it’s plausible that a Jesuit conspiracy against the Catholic Church and society were being orchestrated by Jews. Add to this the fact that Jews were closely involved with the Protestant Reformation, around the time the Jesuits were formed, and the plausibility becomes stronger. Further evidence that the Jesuits, if they are acting on behalf of the Church’s interests, are a failed world conspirator is in the fact that world trends are going in the opposite direction of everything Catholic, be it the Church’s pro-life stance, anti-modernism, traditional marriage, etc. Add to that the world’s slide towards nihilism and the Jesuit conspiracy theory loses even more credibility.

“Jesuit Trained” – Jesuit conspiracy theorists claim that the Black Pope works to subvert society by positioning Jesuits in high positions of power throughout the world via the Knights of Malta and Jesuit training centres (Jesuit-founded universities). Since Jesuit universities are open to the public and do not require students to be Catholics, much less Jesuits, it’s a little ridiculous for the Jesuit theorists to claim that so and so is a Jesuit agent or “Jesuit trained” merely because they went to a Jesuit-founded university. But that’s exactly what they do. Due to the spread of the disease of modernism, Jesuit universities are now more or less secular and hostile to the Catholic Church. For example, many Jesuit-founded universities advocate—not just accept—homosexual rights, abortion, women’s liberation, LGBT rights, etc. Historian E. Michael Jones, a well respected traditional Catholic, was fired by one of these supposed Catholic universities because he simply stood for traditional Catholicism. Whether a result of the Jesuits or Second Vatican Council proscriptions, these Jesuit universities cannot be considered Catholic other than by having Catholic roots. The claim of someone being “Jesuit-trained” is vague and meaningless in the context in which these Jesuit theorists give. They have to provide more than just someone’s mere attendance at a Jesuit-founded university. And with their claim that many Jesuits are secret members, they think they can disregard the burden of proof further more.

The Scottish and York rites of freemasonry and their degrees—the names of some which were hijacked from the Catholic Church.

Knights of Malta – Jesuit theorists, where they can’t malign someone based on their university attendance, malign them by their membership with the Knights of Malta or even if someone displays a logo or symbol[i] bearing the remotest resemblance to the symbols of the Knights of Malta or the Jesuits. If those canards fail, they outright deceive their audience by falsely associating the Catholic Knights of Malta—officially called Sovereign Military Order of Malta—with Freemasonry. Speculative freemasonry’s York Rite has a degree titled Order of Knights of Malta (click on the image to the right to see a larger view of the masonic structure of degrees). The Vatican has issued a clarification stating that it does not recognize any other group using the Malta name but its own.

“…the Holy See recognises and supports only the Sovereign Military Order of Malta – also known as the Sovereign Military Hospitaller Order of Saint John of Jerusalem of Rhodes and of Malta – and the Equestrian Order of the Holy Sepulchre of Jerusalem. The Holy See foresees no additions or innovations in this regard.

All other orders, whether of recent origin or mediaeval foundation, are not recognised by the Holy See. Furthermore, the Holy See does not guarantee their historical or juridical legitimacy, their ends or organisational structures.

To avoid any possible doubts, even owing to illicit issuing of documents or the inappropriate use of sacred places, and to prevent the continuation of abuses which may result in harm to people of good faith, the Holy See confirms that it attributes absolutely no value whatsoever to certificates of membership or insignia issued by these groups, and it considers inappropriate the use of churches or chapels for their so-called “ceremonies of investiture”.[ii]

The Jesuit theorists must not have foreseen this embarrassing repudiation of their claims that the Jesuits and the Catholic Church are somehow masonic because of the Malta link. Perhaps had they done some actual research, they would have seen this coming and abandoned the lie. Furthermore, Freemasonry uses Jewish and Protestant names for its degrees as well. Using their reasoning, we could argue that Jews and Protestants are masonic because of this also.

The Knights Templar – Some Jesuit theorists will go so far as to say that the RCC founded freemasonry through the Knights Templar, a military order established by the Church at the beginning of the Middle Ages (the Templars eventually became corrupt and apparently compromised with gnosticism, and the Church disbanded them accordingly). Because the freemasons (an occult group established long after the Catholic Templars had been abolished) have a masonic title called “Order of Knights Templar Commandery”, part of the York Rite initiation, some confuse the two different Templar groups. Of course, the Jesuit theorists capitalize on this confusion and try to say that the two are one and the same. They elaborate on how the Medieval Templars supposedly evolved into what is now called freemasonry (they completely ignore the fact that the Catholic Church abolished the Templar order). The apparent gnostic influence on the Catholic Templars, before they were disbanded, was likely due to the spread of Kabbalism, so the Kabbalah is the root of what eventually became freemasonry, not “Templarism”. Consider that the written Kabbalah came into prominence in the 12th and 13th centuries, the same time the Templars were rising in power.

“The Jewish connection with modern Freemasonry is an established fact everywhere manifested in its history. The Jewish formulas employed by Freemasonry, the Jewish traditions which run through its ceremonial, point to a Jewish origin, or to the work of Jewish contrivers . . . . Who knows but behind the Atheism and desire of gain which impels them to urge on Christians to persecute the Church and destroy it, there lies a hidden hope to reconstruct their Temple, and in the darkest depths of secret society plotting there lurks a deeper society still which looks to a return to the land of Judah and to the re- building of the Temple of Jerusalem?”[iii]

Today, there is no organization called the Knights Templar, yet Jesuit conspiracy sites are full of references to them as if they still exist and run the world. Columnist Atila Sinke Guimarães explains in detail the history of the Knights of Malta and the Templars in contrast with their masonic imitators.[iv]

The suspicious trajectory of the Jesuit conspiracy theoryWhether the Jesuits were guilty of the charges laid against them in their early days, it’s highly suspicious that most, if not all, groups supporting theories against them were in league with Jews, be they Protestant reformers (late middle ages), Enlightenment thinkers, masonic/illuminist agents (18th and 19th centuries), and Jewish lobbies (20th and 21st centuries). All of these anti-Catholic groups are themselves accused of organizing and/or leading international conspiracies, so they have the motive to deflect criticism of themselves and provide a scapegoat in the hopes of saving face. Modern Jesuit conspiracy theorists appear to target two audiences: anti-Catholics and conspiracy researchers. The latter targeting functions to manage opposition to the NWO conspiracy and is further evidence that the Jesuit theorist meme is actually advancing the NWO’s revolutionary progress.

Nazi propaganda phamphlet condemning the Jesuits.

The Nazi fallacySo blind to history, the Jesuit theorists assume that because the Catholic Church is anti-Jewish by nature, restricted Jewish influence in society, especially during the Middle Ages, and helped spread anti-Jewish conspiracy theories, it must be that it was also in league with or brought about the rise of Nazi Germany’s racialist policies. Jewish lobbies share in common with Jesuit theorists this malicious libel against the Church. They blame Catholicism for the rise of Hitler and the alleged Holocaust of 6 million Jews. What they won’t tell their audience is that the Nazis propagated Jesuit conspiracy theories themselves—Hubert Hermanns’ The Jesuit: The Obscurantist without a Homeland[v], for example—and persecuted and murdered Jesuits on account of their membership. But more importantly, Roman Catholic opposition to Judaism has always been on the grounds of the Jew as a “theological construct” created in opposition to Christ, in the words of Catholic historian E. Michael Jones. Papal decrees against Jews throughout the Church’s 2,000-year history maintains that Jewry should be resisted on the grounds of their rebellion against Christ and that Jews should be restricted from positions of influence in society, should they seek to subvert the Catholic theocracy. Papal bull Sicut Judaeis, first issued during the Middle Ages, is emphatic that Jews are not to be harmed. Furthermore, Catholics are forbidden on pain of excommunication to force convert Jews or take their property. Pope Callixtus II states in the original bull:

“[The Jews] ought to suffer no prejudice. We, out of the meekness of Christian piety, and in keeping in the footprints or Our predecessors of happy memory, the Roman Pontiffs Calixtus, Eugene, Alexander, Clement, admit their petition, and We grant them the buckler of Our protection.”

It’s obvious that because of the Jewish penchant for antagonistic behaviour, the Popes foresaw the potential for resentment of the Jews to evolve into pogroms. It’s absolutely absurd to think that the Catholic Church could in any way have brought about the “Holocaust” of the Jews, especially considering that 18 successive Popes re-affirmed Sicut Judaeis. The Church has not changed its stance in this respect. The Catholic Church never endorsed, either officially or unofficially, the policies of Hitler and the national socialists. Catholic opposition to Judaism then is quite different from Nazi opposition, which was based entirely on the assumption that Jews were racially corrupt.

The Jesuit theorist runs into a major contradiction when he attempts to say that Nazism is a Jesuit creation, because then he must account for his other theory that the Jesuits also supposedly created Zionism—something that runs contrary to Nazism. I won’t elaborate here, but the evidence suggests that Nazism is actually a Jewish creation, using a Cabbalist dialectic of opposites, which paved the way for establishing the illegal state of Israel in 1948 as well as the Holocaust dogma of Judaism[vi], which has undeservedly become iconic in recent history. There is also evidence that Hitler was not legitimate opposition to the Jewish money power, and even evidence that Hitler himself may have been Jewish.[vii]

The Zionist fallacyIt seems the Jesuit theorist rests his entire claim that the Jesuits created Zionism on one obscure Jesuit who postulated a theory that was never established as Catholic dogma. It’s true that Jesuit Francisco Ribera (1537-1591) did advocate some views that would fall into a “futurist” eschatological point of view; however, it was not millenarianist, or of the premillennial dispensationalist type that lies at the root of the Christian Zionist heresy.[viii] Zionism comes from an arrested rendering of the Old Testament concept of a chosen people. This is why the Jews murdered the Old Testament prophets who tried to correct them on their perverted supremacist vision of what it meant to be God’s chosen people. This is one of the reasons why the Jews also murdered our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, for He pointed out the deception and evil in their supremacist yearnings. The whole Ribera claim is inconsistent in that Ribera allegedly concocted his views as counter-reformation teaching. But the Reformation was advocating futurism (specifically millenarianism), so how could he be countering it with more futurism (his supposed futurism was really amillennial)? Jesuit theorists are grasping at straws with this one. It doesn’t take a genius to figure out that because the Jews rejected Jesus, they still await at future Messiah (futurism) when he will supposedly rule and reign with the Jews on the present Earth. Futurism, really messianism, is essentially Jewish. Furthermore, Ribera didn’t write his 500-page commentary on the Book of Revelation to start a new idea. He was indeed countering the Reformation propaganda of millenarianism, which held that the Papacy was the anti-Christ, Beast system, and the coming world messiah would destroy it and set up his millennial reign on Earth, headquartered in Jerusalem. Catholic teaching holds that the Church’s reign on this Earth since Christ died and was resurrected is evidence of fulfillment of Christ’s reign on Earth; therefore, a future millennial reign is not necessary.

The freemason fallacyEqually as absurd and related to the Zionist fallacy is the claim that modern freemasonry is a continuation of the Catholic Knights Templars—Catholicism itself. Forget that Popes have issued decrees condemning freemasonry and its Enlightenment, libertarian offshoots; forget that Catholicism itself is philosophically and ideologically opposed to freemasonry, the Jesuit theorists are most persistent with this fallacy. Instead of providing any evidence that the Catholic Church is behind freemasonry, the Jesuit theorist will simply make the reach by associating the Church with freemasonry through the Knights Templars and Knights of Malta confusion. That’s their evidence—semantics.

Papal pronouncements against freemasonry and its offshoots—specifically “Americanism,” which sprang from the Enlightenment and masonic libertarianism—include but are not limited to the following:

To demonstrate the seriousness with which the Church took of the heresy of freemasonry, 12 different Popes issued a total of 23 three papal pronouncements against it. No other heresy has received more attention.

The Judeo-masonic ambition to overthrow throne (monarchy) and altar (Catholic Church), which is well documented, was achieved through a series of subversions[ix] and revolutions—the French Revolution being one of which was most successful, as France was as stronghold of the Catholic theocracy. England, where Catholicism had been overthrown during the 16th-century reign of apostate King Henry VIII, was already under the control of freemasonry (specifically Rosicrucianism) and Enlightenment thought at the time of the French Revolution. Of course, the Jewish-masonic alliance was already well established during the 16th-century Protestant Reformation, so the Reformation was a natural fit for the anti-Catholic revolutionary arsenal of the cryptocracy; in fact, all the evidence suggests that freemasonry is a covert extension of Judaism—a sort of philo-Semitic religion with perhaps more aggressive methods than Judaism in destroying Christ’s influence on Earth. The Jesuit theorist will distort and twist history in all kinds of ways in a desperate attempt to fit their anti-Catholic, pro-Jewish worldview. It then becomes imperative for the reader to understand real history in order to see through the lies.

The Illuminati fallacy
When Adam Weishaupt founded the Order of the Illuminati in Bavaria in 1776, it seems he intended to prevent the Jesuit order, which had at that point been suppressed by Pope Clement XIV, from regaining their former position in Europe.[x] Weishaupt was not a Jesuit himself; however, Jesuits educated him during his youth. Jesuit theorists focus only on this, while ignoring the more important manoeuvrings that were going on during the formation of Illuminist systems. Additionally, Weishaupt did not invent the concept of Illuminism, which was based on a perversion of the Catholic sacrament of confession.

“It wasn’t the goal of world domination, which, in the popular mind at the time, the Illuminati shared with the Jesuits that the public found as upsetting; it was the means whereby the Illuminati were going to achieve those goals. Weishaupt took the idea of examination of conscience and sacramental confession from the Jesuits and, after purging them of their religious elements, turned them into a system of intelligence gathering, spying, and informing, in which members were trained to spy on each other and inform their superiors.”[xi]

Jewish writer Bernard Lazare, an anti-Catholic, seems to brag about the Jewish orchestration of secret societies and the Illuminati:

“There were Jews around Weishaupt, and Martinez de Pasqualis, a Jew of Portuguese origin, organised numerous groups of Illuminati in France, recruiting many adepts to whom he taught the doctrine of reintegration. The lodges founded by Martinez were mystical, whilst the other orders of Freemasonry were rather rationalist. This permits one to say that the secret societies represented the two sides of the Jewish mind: practical rationalisation and pantheism.”[xii]

Some historians credit Martinez de Pasqualis with creating Illuminism, not Weishaupt.

The Illuminati wasn’t so much an organization as much as it was a concept of blackmail and espionage that was soon adopted by almost all secret societies, and it is still in use today. Talk about the Illuminati’s influence on society is sort of a red herring, especially in the way that it is used today. Modern conspiracy researchers portray the Illuminati as the end all, be all…as a highly organized institution, which it isn’t. It’s a concept or system. The Jesuit theorist obsession with Weishaupt, the Illuminati, and their supposed collaboration with the Jesuits shows their inclination to sensationalism rather than historical accuracy.